We invite you to read the opinion piece by Gonzalo Bravo, our senior associate in the Public Law and Regulated Markets Group, on the implications and challenges of the Universal Carrier Law.
Companies often fall into the trap of viewing new technical regulations as mere operational checklists. In other words, they comply simply to ensure the continuity of their business. However, the entry into force of Law No. 21,695, known as the “Universal Charger Law,” could become a headache for those who believe they can continue operating under business-as-usual logic until the very last minute.
The regulation takes effect on October 10, 2026, for mobile telephony, so those subject to it must keep in mind that as of that date, products that do not comply with the regulation—even if they were imported previously—cannot be sold. In that sense, any argument along the lines of “If I imported it before the law, I have an acquired right and the regulation cannot be applied retroactively” sounds good legally, but does not apply in this case.
The principle of non-retroactivity protects an import transaction that has already taken place, but it does not grant authorization to indefinitely market products that, at the time of future sale, will be technically illegal. The law regulates the act of marketing, which is governed in actum. To argue that SERNAC will accept the sale of a phone with an older port in December 2026, simply because it arrived in Chile in 2025, is a rather risky bet, and in my opinion, unfounded.
This is where the regulator’s role comes in. Today, SERNAC not only has stronger regulatory powers but also technological tools such as web scraping and digital monitoring that make detecting a violation as easy as filtering an Excel spreadsheet. If your e-commerce platform continues to offer a bundled package with no option to unbundle, or a device without a USB-C port, the violation is flagrant, and the fine of up to 300 UTMs per case, as provided for in Article 24 of Law 19,496, is a tangible reality.
The enforcement of this new regulation should mean a more active role for the authority in its oversight. Why? It is a great opportunity for SERNAC to achieve successful enforcement. These cases should be easy to prove, have high public visibility, and align with the sustainability agenda. No complex expert reports will be needed to file complaints and secure penalties.
That said, regarding the mitigation measures under discussion, we must be cautious about using stickers or labels. Filling boxes with stickers to comply with the required informational pictograms is a valid and pragmatic solution for preserving the packaging while meeting the enhanced disclosure requirements set forth in the law. However, attempting to validate obsolete hardware with a sticker warning will likely not be tolerated by the authorities. These are distinct obligations. No sticker can turn a Lightning port into a USB-C port. The technical compliance of the device will be a key factor.
Given that the law provided for an extended two-year grace period for mobile devices, the recommendation for the industry is to bear the cost of inventory cleanup now, as attempting to find an alternative to compliance with so few months remaining before the new regulation takes effect may not yield the expected results.
Column written by:
Gonzalo Bravo | Public Law and Regulated Markets Group Senior Associate | gbravo@az.cl
